O ya I pushed it again now my cpu runs at 466mhz
Printable View
O ya I pushed it again now my cpu runs at 466mhz
Let it sink in a bit.
Then run PC Mark 2002 and let us see how you did.
like the thing said. its only a 2% increase so u wont see taht much of a diff. and if u use it for every day work u definately wont see the diff.
looks like a 12.5% increase to meQuote:
Originally posted by kazaaliterock@11 November 2003 - 05:27
like the thing said. its only a 2% increase so u wont see taht much of a diff. and if u use it for every day work u definately wont see the diff.
OK i tried overclocking to 466mhz but it wouldn't load win2k same thing for 450mhz
Dammit those people on www.overclockers.com are lyers
I wonder if i'll see any improvement in GTA3?
I overclock my AMD Athlon "T-Bird" to 1.2 Ghz from 1.0 Ghz,
don't see any improvement either <_<
Yeah Zazu, but where are you looking?
DL a copy of PC Mark 2002 and run some benchmarks. There is almost no way that you can objectively assess your progress without repeatedly running a test like this every time you make a change and then comparing the numbers.
Make sure that you have some good temp monitoring software installed so you can keep a close eye on your CPU.
If you have clocked up your chip did you also tighten up your memory timing also?
Besides being fairly tedious, OCing can be surprisingly frustrating and certainly potentially harmful so you must be patient and willing to take baby steps.
In the end, unless your machine was in truly pathetic condition to begin with, chances are you won't really feel a big difference. You will however have the satisfaction of knowing that you've made it run as well as possible.
If that's not enough for you then it's time to go out and drop major dollars on some new hardware.
BTW, I do not want to present myself as an expert in the area of overclocking. I have done quite a bit of reading ( there are numerous sites devoted to the subject), but only recently have I begun to dabble in the actual practise. My machine is ( at least for now) air-cooled and I was very careful not to overstress the components.
After making a change I not only ran PC Mark to see if I had gained (or lost) anything, but I also ran burn in tests to determine if the configuration was stable and if temps remained acceptable.
So far I have made some pretty good gains without suffering from random reboots or unacceptably high temps.
As a purely intellectual exercise OCing has been very rewarding, but I can't really say that I can feel any difference.
Also...
Be very skeptical of recommendations/results that you will see posted in some of these sites. Overclocking is definately a example of "My dick is bigger than yours" and I'm convinced that people exaggerate ( and even outright lie) just to impress their peers. Even if true, what works for one person's rig may be fatal to yours. You can certainly gain insight and direction from these folks, but let your own results be your ultimate guide.
And be prepared to clear your CMOS often...
looks like a 12.5% increase to me [/b][/quote]Quote:
Originally posted by 3rd gen noob+11 November 2003 - 06:29--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (3rd gen noob @ 11 November 2003 - 06:29)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-kazaaliterock@11 November 2003 - 05:27
like the thing said. its only a 2% increase so u wont see taht much of a diff. and if u use it for every day work u definately wont see the diff.
uhh cuz he overclocked again after my post lol
but i suggest just goign out to buy a new processor rather then trying to oc this ne more.
try hitting 1Ghz :lol: :lol:
hehehe
I clear my CMOS so often i just made a swith that resets it... hehehehe... dude looks like you are doing well Ocing is not easy, those dam Cpus can be stuborn as hell :P but stick with it, remember, you are telling your proccesor to go faster than it was originally told to go... it is walking in the dark, and can very easily get caught on something.. overheating, power input, FSb many different variables... and even though on my rig i can push to 3 gigahertz, it doesn't run stable... :( and so make sure even if not the prog clocker said then get something to test for stabibility and to get temps within an exeptable range...Quote:
BTW, I do not want to present myself as an expert in the area of overclocking. I have done quite a bit of reading ( there are numerous sites devoted to the subject), but only recently have I begun to dabble in the actual practise. My machine is ( at least for now) air-cooled and I was very careful not to overstress the components.
After making a change I not only ran PC Mark to see if I had gained (or lost) anything, but I also ran burn in tests to determine if the configuration was stable and if temps remained acceptable.
So far I have made some pretty good gains without suffering from random reboots or unacceptably high temps.
As a purely intellectual exercise OCing has been very rewarding, but I can't really say that I can feel any difference.
Also...
Be very skeptical of recommendations/results that you will see posted in some of these sites. Overclocking is definately a example of "My dick is bigger than yours" and I'm convinced that people exaggerate ( and even outright lie) just to impress their peers. Even if true, what works for one person's rig may be fatal to yours. You can certainly gain insight and direction from these folks, but let your own results be your ultimate guide.
And be prepared to clear your CMOS often...
Me too.Quote:
Originally posted by SciManAl@11 November 2003 - 09:08
I clear my CMOS so often i just made a swith that resets it... hehehehe
Makes life a lot easier, don't it?
yeah pain in the ass to open it again and again, and my clear acrylic case just pics up finger prints out of no-where... one of my goals though is to get an oldschool mobo, and have all the jumpers made to have switches, so i can show newbies what to do when OCing... easily... hehehehe :rolleyes:
on the subject of overclocking, i today overclocked my amd xp 2000+ form 1.67ghz to 1.8 and its 120% stable. (12.5 x 144 or 6.25 x 288 whichever way you see it) and another thing is that my cpu and system temps havent increased :D
wow nice job, my bros computer uses a 2000+ :rolleyes: hehehehe i will try that combo, nice job man!! not a single degree??
And have you run any tests to see if you actually gained anything?
I repeat...you MUST run a benchmark app.
I actually saw my scores start to go down, even as my (theoretical) speeds went up.
Your RAM is particularly susceptable to this phenomonon.
Even though I was able to boot using 5,2,2,2.5t RAM timing, I was losing bigtime points on the memory score. 6,3,3,2.5t gave me the best results.
Doesn't OCing just for the sake of saying that you've done it seem kind of pointless?
C'mon Kunal, you seem like a fairly bright guy, take the extra step and prove that you're doing yourself some good. Get PC Mark2002, reset your BIOS back to stock and run a test (just the CPU, memory and HDD tests will do). Then make a change and rerun the test. Keep track of your scores and what you changed at each stage.
Then you'll have something to brag about.
If all you are interested is higher frequency numbers, a smart man would simply go out and buy a faster chip.... :P
clocker, need to download pcmark2002, ill do that when im home from school tomorrow.
but heres what i got using the benmarks in aida32:
Overclocked
2040MB/s Memory read
672MB/s Memory write
Stock
1884MB/s Memory Read
605MB/s Memory write
So as you can see these results look promising :D
Thank you and Way to Go!
You're the son I never had.
Wait a minute, Ido have a son...
Edit:Kunal, I hope you are familiar with clearing/resetting your CMOS as you will be doing it with increasing frequency as you approach the outer edges of the performance envelope. You can either leave your case side off to make access faster ( but then your temp figures are useless) or add a remote switch ( which will make you the envy of all your friends- except you won't have any friends if all you do is sit in your room and f*ck with your computer...).
Either way, be ready...
clocker this is unbelievably way of topic, but how are old are you (if you don't mind me asking)?
How old do you think I am?
that picture you have under your handle finally makes sense hehehe :o :P
"If it aint broken it don't need fixin" - Does that apply to horses too? :lol:
Back on topic, I put a system together recently which at boot up started with minimum settings for clock settings, then implemented the bios settings at the end of the detection process. This allowed you to get into the bios setup and change settings without clearing everything down. :)
Only problem is I can't remember if it was the one with the XFX board that I put together for a friend or the Asus board i put together for my nephew. :(
35Quote:
Originally posted by clocker@12 November 2003 - 02:07
How old do you think I am?
clocker, just for you (and maybe myself) i download pcmark 2002 and here are my results:
Overclocked:
5396 CPU
3603 Memory
734 HDD
Stock:
4898 CPU
3281 Memory
697 HDD
I quite happy with results, and the two test were ran under the same (well as close as i could get them) conditions.
and why did my hdd score improve :huh:
Congratulations.Quote:
Originally posted by Kunal@12 November 2003 - 10:42
clocker, just for you (and maybe myself) i download pcmark 2002 and here are my results:
Overclocked:
5396 CPU
3603 Memory
734 HDD
Stock:
4898 CPU
3281 Memory
697 HDD
I quite happy with results, and the two test were ran under the same (well as close as i could get them) conditions.
and why did my hdd score improve :huh:
Have you adjusted your memory timing at all or is your increase solely due to upping the clock rate??
I don't know why the HDD scores vary. Mine do too from test to test, although the general range will stay pretty constant. I always run a quick defrag before a run, just in hopes that it will level out the playing field, but I really don't know that it matters.You will also note that although your HDD scores did go up, it was only by 30 some points, where your other two scores climbed by a couple of hundred points. I think that this is just slight variations from test to test. If your HDD score had risen by 100 points then I would really start to wonder...
its all due to the increase in clock speed, aint adjusted memory timing.
clocker just as a quick comparison can you post your scores? (i know your systems much better than mine though)
Well since you've indulged me, it only seems fair...
http://galleries.vinyamar.com/ps/sho...Vd4Im&ext=.jpg
http://galleries.vinyamar.com/ps/sho...VmzUR&ext=.gif
Edit:
Now that you've done the easy part, go for the memory timing. It will take much more time and patience, but why stop halfway?
Find your memory timings in BIOS and start from one end to the other. Pick one number and lower it one step. Save to BIOS and boot. If you can boot, go back and lower it one more step. Repeat until you can't POST, then clear your CMOS and reset everything to the last good number. Repeat with the next three. After you've gotten to the lowest numbers that don't crash your system run the memory test again. If you've gotten a good result then go ahead and run a burn in test to demonstrate your system stability. Keep an eye on temps of course.
Then....
Just to be sure, go back to BIOS and loosen all the numbers by one step and then rerun the memory test. You might be surprised.
Although I could POST and boot with the timing set at 5,2,2,2.5t, my memory score was considerably better running at 6,3,3,2.5t. Go figure.
I don't know enough about it to explain this result, but the numbers were repeatable, so I trust them. Perhaps an expert can explain this- and if anyone knows of an easier way to do this whole process, I'd love to hear it...
man clocker your scores are ace, well i did ask for it didnt i :D
The deal here Kunal is not to compare your scores to mine, but rather your pretweak score to your post tweak score.
I'm sure that there are many rigs on the board that can kick my ass, but at least I know that my setup is as good as I can make it ( given my current level of knowledge...) and that's about as good as you can hope for. Everything else is just a question of cubic dollars. More money= more performance.
When you increased your fsb speed you have also increased your memory speed and your pci speed.
The increased memory speed is directly shown in the increased memory throughput.
The increased pci speed only has an effect on the transfer of data to the ide controller but not on data transfer from that point on, so the effect is reduced.
It may be possible to change these clocks separately, depending on your bios. If so, you may be able to increase the speed of various parts of your system independently of the others. For instance you may be able to increase processor speed to a point where other subsystems (eg pic) would have become unstable.
Clocker, the reason why 'slower' clock timings can be more productive is this: in burst mode, if the memory chip misses the clock strobe, it has to terminate the current transfer. This then means that a new transfer has to be set up to complete the original data request. If the memory subsystem is running beyond it's designated settings, this is more likely to occur and results in reduced data rates.
That makes sense ( even to me!), lynx.
Thanks.
Do you know of a better way to approach memory timing tweaking than the painful and awkward method that I used? Maybe you could save Kunal some grief...
yes i have increased my memory speed aswell
my cpu is at 1.8 ghz instead og 1.67
memory speed is 360mhz instead of 333
pci is 36 instead of 33
agp 72 instead of 66
i dont think there is an option in bios to change everything individually, so im not gonna push my system any further, as it starts to get unstable (reminds of windows 98!) :ph34r:
Did your memory scores go up too?
clocker the settings are the same as when i ran the test, i increased the system bud, so all of the others go up to....Quote:
Originally posted by clocker@12 November 2003 - 21:49
Did your memory scores go up too?
Since the timings (5,2,2,2.5 or whatever) are based on the standard clock speed (333MHz?) they will obviously be affected themselves by the increased clock speed. And since you don't know what your chips will tolerate there is unfortunately no substitute for tweaking each setting individually.
In fact it is worse than that, since adjusting one setting can have an effect on one of the other settings, so 5,3,x,x may work, and 6,2,x,x may also work but 5,2,x,x does not, and that's just two variables.